Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Flight deck access

Old 27th Jul 2018, 21:33
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 383
Originally Posted by havick View Post


sorry typo on my phone. I meant NO such restrictions in my earlier post.

FM1 is just another name for a company ops manual in the US, theyíve also got a myriad of other names/abbreviations.

Ahh. Gotcha. That makes sense.

Yup. Iím very familiar
JPJP is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 03:51
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: preferably somewhere colder!
Posts: 62
Originally Posted by JPJP View Post
Without a FA or Jumpseater on the flight deck, how does one confirm the returning crewmember ? Does the lone pilot get out of his seat to check that the returning pilot isnít under duress etc. etc ? Obviously camera systems negate this requirement.
How do 2 pilots currently check the FA isnít under duress when he/she asks for flight deck access on the interphone as neither pilot gets out of their seat to check presently so Iím confused why you think the situation is any different when there is only 1 person remaining in the flight deck??
NGsim is online now  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 04:03
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 383
Originally Posted by NGsim View Post


How do 2 pilots currently check the FA isn’t under duress when he/she asks for flight deck access on the interphone as neither pilot gets out of their seat to check presently so I’m confused why you think the situation is any different when there is only 1 person remaining in the flight deck??

There’s an incorrect assumption in your quote. I’m talking about the way they do it in the U.S. - the origin of the this procedure after 9/11. The EU seemed to start thinking about it after the Eurowings incident (mass murder). I’m not commenting on the efficacy of any system in place.


Last edited by JPJP; 28th Jul 2018 at 04:15.
JPJP is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 17:36
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 2,740
Probably best not to continue with this line of discussion...
Icarus2001 is online now  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 19:40
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 1,703
Icarus, fret not. The baddies have all the airline training manuals and SOPs anyway. Having cost the aviation industry billions in security measures, they much prefer now to mount their attacks externally, as recent history shows.
Mach E Avelli is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 21:03
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 264
I'd be more worried about the reaction of your head of security to posting sensitive and confidential procedures on a public forum.
Iron Bar is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 00:41
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by Iron Bar View Post
I'd be more worried about the reaction of your head of security to posting sensitive and confidential procedures on a public forum.
One or two flights and it will be pretty clear what the company procedure on toilet breaks is - just select an aisle seat in row 2 or 3 and be observant.
Bend alot is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 10:24
  #48 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,043
Personal view but I believe that to suggest that a FA on the flight deck during a toilet break is compromising her duties in the cabin is utter bo**ocks. The FA's duties on the FD are to ensure that legitimate access to the flight deck is not denied and that the safety of all passengers, crew and aircraft are not compromised, what, in the cruise, could be more important than that?
parabellum is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 13:44
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,538
Originally Posted by parabellum View Post
Personal view but I believe that to suggest that a FA on the flight deck during a toilet break is compromising her duties in the cabin is utter bo**ocks. The FA's duties on the FD are to ensure that legitimate access to the flight deck is not denied and that the safety of all passengers, crew and aircraft are not compromised, what, in the cruise, could be more important than that?
Given that the actions of a pilot with nefarious intent resulted in this 'policy' How precisely does the industry ensure that a similar 'murderous intent' is not present in the (FA) person just let on the flight deck?
Rated De is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 13:51
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Perth
Posts: 59
Personal view but I believe that to suggest that a FA on the flight deck during a toilet break is compromising her duties in the cabin is utter bo**ocks. The FA's duties on the FD are to ensure that legitimate access to the flight deck is not denied and that the safety of all passengers, crew and aircraft are not compromised, what, in the cruise, could be more important than that?
So how does the flight deck FA do that exactly when the remaining Pilot could easily destroy the aircraft in far less time than it takes for the other Pilot to zip up and return? And how does the FA do that exactly when one Pilot could easily destroy the aircraft even with the other Pilot sitting in their designated Pilot seat?

The truth is the only duty the FA is performing in the flight deck is that of appeasing the ignorant travelling public!
F.Nose is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 00:32
  #51 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,043
The truth is the only duty the FA is performing in the flight deck is that of appeasing the ignorant travelling public!
Even more utter bollocks.
parabellum is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 03:56
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Perth
Posts: 59
The truth is the only duty the FA is performing in the flight deck is that of appeasing the ignorant travelling public!
And fools like parabellum!
F.Nose is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 08:45
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,711
FNose.....
mate, can you read?

Iíve previously posted why my company have done exactly this since locked doors came in post 9-11.....

No issues and a genuine reason why.

Open your Eyes and mind, youíll find itís a big World out there and others may just already successfully use these proceedures........

ACMS is online now  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 08:48
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 229
The company I worked for was one of the first to implement the two on the flight deck policy soon after the armoured doors were fitted. The policy at the time had nothing to do with the mental health of the lone crew member on the flight deck. It was implemented purely for the reason that if anything happened to this crew member whilst alone there was no possible way to access the flight deck. The door could only be opened from the flight deck side if closed and locked by one of two methods.
Xeptu is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 10:25
  #55 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,043
The trouble with F.Nose and those like him who ridicule the idea of the FA standing in is that they keep quoting the million to one chance against a FA on the FD policy and choose to ignore the rest of the time when the system works just fine. During their flying career these individuals may just discover that their life depends on a lot less than a million to one chance at times. Once out of the safe environment of European/Antipodean ATC the game is on.
parabellum is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 11:59
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Perth
Posts: 59
ACMS...In the extremely unlikely event that the remaining Pilot becomes incapacitated during the time the other is taking a comfort break the door can still be opened via key pad in good time.

Parabellum...Are you referring to the possibility of a rogue FA taking advantage of the remaining Pilot and sabotaging the aircraft? If so I have never claimed such a risk to be a threat....read my post again carefully!

My point is that a FA on the flight deck is unnecessary and does not effectively improve safety in any way.

Last edited by F.Nose; 30th Jul 2018 at 12:13.
F.Nose is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 13:24
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 10
Originally Posted by F.Nose View Post
ACMS...In the extremely unlikely event that the remaining Pilot becomes incapacitated during the time the other is taking a comfort break the door can still be opened via key pad in good time.

Parabellum...Are you referring to the possibility of a rogue FA taking advantage of the remaining Pilot and sabotaging the aircraft? If so I have never claimed such a risk to be a threat....read my post again carefully!

My point is that a FA on the flight deck is unnecessary and does not effectively improve safety in any way.
not all aircraft have keypads
havick is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 14:05
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by havick View Post


not all aircraft have keypads
And - F Knows y not!
Bend alot is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 23:51
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Perth
Posts: 59
not all aircraft have keypads
Good grief.

The cold hard facts are; The 2 on the flight deck at all times rule was mandated by the regulator in Australia as a direct result of a disturbed 'German Wings' FO deliberately flying an aircraft into terrain. However....the 2 on the flight deck rule does not prevent either Pilot destroying the aircraft and its occupants at any time.....if they so desire! So the rule does not achieve its objective other than it may have an influence on where and how the job is done.

Nobody would object if the few operators of aircraft 'without keypads' develop procedures, such as the 2 on the flight deck, to mitigate the risk of Pilot incapacitation at an inappropriate time......but that does not mean there needs to be a blanket rule for all operators on all aircraft with more than 50 seats, when in the majority of cases the risk is alleviated by other means......such as a key pad.
F.Nose is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2018, 03:53
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 914
Originally Posted by F.Nose View Post
The 2 on the flight deck at all times rule was mandated by the regulator in Australia as a direct result of a disturbed 'German Wings' FO deliberately flying an aircraft into terrain.
Fortunately, it was never mandated by the regulator in Australia.

I believe the practice was introduced by mutual agreement between the Airlines and the Australian Government to calm the noise at the time - can't find a reference right now, but that's how I remember it.

Which means it probably wouldn't be too hard for the Airlines to discontinue the practice, if they desired to.

All they would need to do is to contain any outcry by using all the appropriate PC nonsense such as "following an extensive review, risk analysis, studies of world's best practice etc etc.."

But the important thing is that those in the position to make change, have to want to make change. Where would that desire come from? It doesn't inconvenience them. Unless of course increased disruptions to cabin service start causing the Frequent Flyers to complain.
Derfred is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.